Madalina Diaconu_Mapping Urban Smellscapes

7/21/2019 Madalina Diaconu_Mapping Urban Smellscapes

1/17


2/17


3/17

3

Natural odours were located in equal proportions along the Danube, on the Donauinsel and in

the Vienna Woods, followed by the central parks (the Volksgarten, which boasts a famous

rose garden, and the Prater). Food smells clustered around the Naschmarkt (the Central

market), which inspired the most complex list of odours, followed by the inner city. Exhaust

fumes were distributed throughout the city, but particularly on the City Belt (Grtel), in the

Inner City and along the Ring which surrounds the first district. Under the heading of organic

waste smells were mentioned, as expected, horses (with the square of St. Stephen Cathedral at

the top, followed by other stations for horse cabs), dogs (throughout the city) and human

sweat (mainly at the University). Other responses referred to hospital smells, to the

atmosphere inside St. Stephens Cathedral, to the odours of flats and staircases, etc.

The study revealed that the residents of Vienna have in general a positive impression

of their city, given that natural odours, which ranked first, were always evaluated positively,

whilst reactions to smells of whats edible were ambivalent. Exhaust fumes and organic waste

smells, which dominate media reports, turned out to be less visible in the answers, even

though mention of them was accompanied by strong emotional reactions. For the

municipality, the study provides good evidence of the residents identification with the city

and its quality of life.1Unfortunately, the lack of similar studies from other cities apart from

Bischoffs analysis of Frankfurt am Main prevents us from making relevant comparisons.

The answers enable us however to make a mental map of the natural area of Vienna according

to two axes: woods and water. This brings a corrective to the traditional image of Vienna,

1This contradicts a study quoted by Peter Payer, according to which two thirds of the Viennese consider that the

air in their city is impure, although its measurable quality has a high quality compared to international standards(Payer 2005).

82%75%

63% 59%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Nature Edible Exhaust fumes

Industry

Organic waste


4/17

4

which is dominated by the green belt (the Vienna Woods). One of the surprises which

emerged from the study was related to two surprising omissions: of the tourist highlight

Schnbrunn, which turned out to be more or less odourless, and of the St. Marx Cemetery, an

old Biedermeier cemetery, famous among city residents for its lilac. The specifically

industrial odours of Vienna proceed from two factories with a long tradition: Manner the

confectioner and Ottakringer Breweryboth are located in an old working class city district,

Ottakring, and are an integral part of Viennese identity, even though they do not yet feature in

tourist itineraries. Last, but not least, these mental maps confirmed that the first underground

line, U1, has its own distinctive smell and that the square in front of St. Stephen Cathedral

(Stephansplatz) is a problematic place, both at the surface and in the underground station.

1.2.Monitoring smell maps

The monitoring smell maps were developed during repeated walks over the same itinerary

during the spring of 2007 and the spring of 2008. This time the subjects were advised to

download the map from the City of Vienna website and to record on it whatever odours they

encountered during their walks, using freely chosen symbols, explaining them in a legend.

Additionally students were asked to note the date and prevailing weather conditions.2

As a matter of fact, in spite of their generic denomination as smell maps, the mental

maps make explicit subjective representations of the urban smellscape of Vienna, whereas the

monitoring maps collect the results of repeated observations. If all spaces have a symbolic

and a material component (Lw 2001, 228), in our study, the symbolic component of the

space is stronger in the mental maps, whereas the material dimension of space, that is the

encountered sources of smells, prevail in the monitoring maps. Leaving this difference apart,

both methods construct a sensescape by spacing smells and correlate subjective perceptions

and representations (first-person accounts) with an objective spatial model (the city map),

which is previous to the immediate sensory experience.

The study in Vienna had been preceded by a smell tour with an interdisciplinary

group drawn from the creative class at a farm in Seven Oaks (Kent) 3. On the one hand, it

appears to be more difficult to draw smell maps in the city than in the countryside because of

the diversity and complexity of urban odours. On the other hand, the urban smellscape

represents the natural environment for a city resident, whose smells can therefore be

recognized more easily. The experiment can be conducted in a purer form in the country

2In one single case, for the smells of the underground stations along the U1 line, the method of spacing (placing

odours on a map) was replaced by a diary.3The smell tour was carried out during one of the Labs organised by PAL (Performing Arts Labs Ltd.).


5/17

5

because one may leave out of account the built structure and focus on the real configuration

of the olfactory space; the walker can also move freely in the country, whereas liberty of

circulation is restricted in the city by the existing street system. The experience in Seven

Oaks, where some members of the group tended to interpret the tour as some sort of

competition they might lose in if they could not smell anything, determined us to introduce a

modification in the method of drawing monitoring smell maps in Vienna: namely it was left to

the subjects to decide if they would stroll alone or in company. We also assumed that repeated

walks might help them engage more deeply with their environment.

2. Categories of olfactory space

Upon closer inspection, the task of drawing smell maps is at the same time quite easy to do

and almost impossible. Easy, because there is no single correct answer to the question What

does a city as a whole smell like? and because in this respect the nose cannot be proved

wrong by a technical device and is still considered the best instrument for analysing odours

(Illedits, Illedits-Lohr 1999, 267). An almost impossible task because it demands that we

visualise smells and thus translate sensory data from one register into another. And this would

contradict the phenomenological thesis according to which each sensory modality constitutes

a specific world which communicates with theothers, as when we see tactile qualities,

yet cannot be entirely replaced by any other.4The graphic form of a smell map is also, from

the point of view of lived experience, paradoxical, because it unifies two incompatible

perspectives: from above (map) and from within the environment ( plain pied, smellscape).

Let us explore this idea and compare three spatial representations: maps, sensescapes and

atmospheres.

2.1.Maps

Usually maps are interpreted as the embodiment of the birds-eye view of a fictitious

spectator, who is supposed to be looking down on the world from a fixed point of view. In

reality, it is impossible to find any point in space from which the perception would coincide

with the image given by a map; in other words, there is no sensory touchstone for maps and

any aerial view would contain distortions in comparison to the corresponding map. Thus all

maps are an abstract construct and not the result of perceived experience, because the map-4The senses communicate with each other, although they are alien to each other (Blumenberg 2002, 47).


6/17


7/17


8/17

8

stream[s] of the world (Tellenbach 1968, 20). Such homogeneous flows of odours cannot be

represented according to the principles of physical-metrical space, they have no limits and no

sides, no parts and no perspectives, and thus can neither be measured, nor counted, nor

divided and not even expressed objectively (ibidem, 29) but at best be described.

To sum up, if we compare the concepts of map, sensescape and atmosphere, it appears

that: 1) structural character (space as a stable order of objects) is strongest in maps and loosest

in atmospheres; 2) the method of analysing and unifying sequences in syntheses is most

appropriate for maps and practically impossible for atmospheres; 3) a sensescape (including a

smellscape) is still related to objects, whereas atmospheres seem to lack any structure and

refer only to a diffuse quality of the environment; 4) maps are in the first place visual,

sensescapes are plural, and atmospheres in a broad sense (not restricted to odours) are integral

and holistic, implying the engagement of the body as a whole. 5) Furthermore, maps are the

result of a deliberate rational elaboration, whereas the spontaneous feeling of atmospheres

escapes rational grounding. Thus sensescapes are intermediate categories between maps and

atmospheres. For all these reasons, the task of mapping the atmosphereof Vienna would be

impossible; to map thesmellscapeof Vienna is only paradoxical, as it endeavours to objectify,

to visualise, to order and to stabilise smells.

3.Reading smell maps

As mentioned above, in the experiment of drawing smell maps7 students were given no

guidance on how to sketch their maps or how to symbolise smells, as this had been conceived

as a heuristic exercise. For example, I was curious to see if they would pinpoint the source of

a particular smell rather than delineate the trail of its dissemination or perhaps indicate the

entire area where a particular smell was noticeable. Would they mention wind direction and

would they distinguish, symbolically, between different qualities of smell, e.g. pungent and

diffuse, sweet and acrid, pervasive and intermittent?

Let me make now some comments on the results. First of all, the maps showed clearly

a tendency to objectify odours, by assigning them to their sources instead of describing them

qualitatively: in other words, Vienna does not smell like this, but smells like or ofsomething.

7

The task to visualise their olfactory experience in the city was rather unusual for students of philosophy.However, given that I also asked other people to draw such smell maps and that precisely those which had a

professional graphic competence (e.g. artists and architects) were most reticent in performing this task, becausethey had not been trained to do that, naivety proved to have its advantages.


9/17

9

This tendency to objectification corresponds not only to the usual reaction to look around for

odoriferous objects when one encounters an unexpected smell, but also to the denomination of

smells mostly by indicating their sources. Accordingly, our cartographers frequently used

pictorial symbols for the sources of odours (horses, sausages, flowers, means of transport,

etc.). In addition, the same categories which provided Kevin Lynch (1989, 60 sq.) with his

visual images of the city can be detected in the representation of the smellscape:

- paths or tracks, as channels along which odours circulate (e.g. along the water course

or streets);

- point-like sources of discrete smells (e.g. pedestrians, in the monitoring smell maps);

- focuses, i.e. strategic points of a city (e.g. the railway station);

- emblems or specific monuments. Most frequently mentioned was St. Stephen

Cathedral, which was represented as a symbolic centre, regardless of its smell.

- Odoriferous areas (in one case, star-like symbols were used explicitly for perimeter,

Umkreis).

It is also worth asking whether the difference between pinpointed sites of isolated odours (as

for the Volksgarten, where the smellscape was represented as a path dotted with flowers) and

hatched areas of smells (as with the Oberlaa Park) depended on the size of the odoriferous

area or if it was simply a matter of fancy.

From all the elements of the image of the city mentioned by Lynch, the borders alone

were less relevant, due to the specific dynamics of odours. This phenomenon of blurred

borders was less obvious in the mental maps than in the monitoring maps. Significant in this

respect is the map of the Opernpassage (the passageway in front of the Opera), drawn by the

architect Kristina Schinegger, as well as her verbal comment: The prevailing smell is a

mixture of unpleasant, yet unidentifiable, because mixed smells (sweat, body odours, urine,

stale and fresh smoke of cigarettes, detergents), briefly, it is a stale and bilgy smell.

Odours change continuously and insidiously: In the middle of the corridor, the smell can be

detected everywhere, but at a certain point it fades away. Cigarette smoke dominates all

other smells in the middle of the corridor as a pervasive pong (or, if we wish, note de

base). The stink of cigarettes makes you [even] want to hold your nose, which hints at the

subjects implicit presence and vulnerability; both are unusual features of maps. The draught

of air inside the passageway is nothing more than a pathof smell (in this case, the current of

fresh air coming from the park outside). The map indicates the continuity of the space by

means of a gradual transition of shades; at the same time, this space is like a bubble within thecity smellscape that contains, in turn, smaller bubbles which are almost hermetically separate


10/17

10

from the environment: The odours of fast-foods in the mall (i.e. the corridor in the middle of

the Opernpassage) can be savoured intensively only after entering the shop, due to the air

conditioning system. For the rest, with the exception of the florists and the newspaper

kiosks, the shops characters cannot be perceived from outside, there are always strong odour

thresholds. The isolated points on the map indicate the occasional scents of passers -by.

As a matter of fact, both the mental and the monitoring smell maps are after all useless

from a practical viewpoint, as long as humans do not find their way by tracking odours, as

animals do; urbanites come across odours, they do not seek them. Moreover, this represents

an artificial experiment compared to the multi-sensory natural experience of everyday life.

Indeed, the real significance of smell maps consists in their implicitly narrative character: they

recount itineraries through the city, are a kind of retrospective storytelling (Ingold 2000,

232) and a re-enactment of strolling (cf. ibidem, 234) or, could perhaps be used in the future

to plan smell tours through the city. In particular, monitoring smell maps retrace paths of

movement and attempt to reconstruct the flow of perception by means of successive odours.

In addition, mapping may be used to sensitise people to odours; for example, some maps

show how strongly the smellscape of a shopping arcade in the inner city (Rotenturmstrae)

may change during the week if we only pay attention to it. Monitoring smell maps may also

serve, if we wish, as some kind of mnemonic instrument or archive for olfactory memories.

(For who can recall how the streets smelt a year ago?) In my opinion, repeated exploration of

the same area in complete awareness of its sensescapes may over time enhance attachment to

a place and develop rituals of identification with it.

From this perspective, it is less important that such maps remain imprecise; their

relative indefiniteness is precisely evidence for the truth of experience, which differs from

accuracy, measured according to scientific standards of objectivity. From the inhabitants

perspective, it is also less important if smells are pleasant or unpleasant in themselves; it is

their context that is crucial: It is important for me to record that the smell of horse urine

wrote Isabella Grandl, the Viennese author of the smell map around Stephansplatz, was not

necessarily something I found disturbing but rather what gave the place its identity. However

I did find the smell of dog urine and exhaust fumes in my face offensive. She even went so

far as to identify the smell of the inner city as a mixture mainly of horse urine, exhaust

fumes, sweet smells and the odours of old walls and food.

The need felt by some map-makers to comment verbally on their experience also

confirmed the limits of imaging methods and reinforced the conviction that language is stillthe best medium for describing odours. These verbal comments are ideal for reconstructing


11/17

11

the experience as aprocess, whereas modern maps tend to present themselves as ready-made

or faits accomplis, which enhances the impression that maps are impersonal and objective. 8

As for the aforementioned main categories of urban smells (natural smells, food odours,

smells of transport and industry, and organic smells), an analysis of their language indicates

that the richest variety in descriptive language was applied to the smells of food, whereas the

in other three categories the terminology tended to be rather repetitive. For example, the

results surprised by their rather monotonous description of the natural smellscape, as if it were

a homogeneous mixture of smells, in which fragrant plants were rarely distinguished from one

another, in contrast to the informal interviews we conducted.9Less surprising were mentions

of smells which are strictly speaking only metaphors or metonymies.

Last, but not least, the question whether it is more suitable to speak of the smellscape

of a city in the singular or of plural smellscapes will here be left undecided. On the one hand,

the smellscape represents a field of forces and intersecting trails, on the other hand, some

drawings indicate the multiplicity of juxtaposed or overlapping smellscapes. For living beings

in any case, to dwell means to move, that is, to transfer the body from one enclosing space to

another, from one (private or public) container into another. From this perspective, to travel

through the city does not mean to go over the world across a somewhat empty space, but to

immerse oneself in bubbles and leave trails behind, to move through a material atmosphere

which is filled with messages of visible and invisible presences and to decode them. If

modern maps resemble deserted theatrical stages and sterile landscapes, smell maps bring

life back and, as experiential reports, narrate fragments of biographies.

4. Characteristics of olfactory space

If the method of mapping urban smellscapes mingles the representation of odours inthe city

(as if the city were a material container for immaterial smells, which might be added to it)

with the odours ofthe city (conceived as a collective living being with a distinctive breath),

let us touch in the following pages on the city of odours, which regards the city itself as a

volatile, invisible and quasi-immaterial space,10and on the characteristics of olfactory space

8On the contrary, Ingold argues that each map is the product of specific practices and is therefore embedded in a

form of life,but that modern science tends to erase the real processes of how knowledge is generated and,

correspondingly, to forget the origin of maps in human activities (cf. Ingold 2000, 225). Thus the making of

maps came to be divorced from the experience of bodily movement in the world. (Ibidem, 234)9

This confirms David Howess remark (2005, 289) about the recession in the general populationsconsciousness of natural odours andprecessionof branded scents.10

One of the challenges when dealing with olfaction consists in the necessary dissociation between materialityand visibility; although invisible, the space of odours or the medium of air has still a subtle material texture.


12/17


13/17

13

the space the odours themselves constitute, as when one scent evokes more volume than

another.

Indeed, the enlargement should be imagined less as an opening which takes place

straight-forwardly, but as a voluminosity (Voluminositt), which is once again defined as a

pre-dimensional volume (ibidem, 386, 397). Schmitz himself is aware of the difficulties

involved by this paradoxical feature of space, when he asks: What is this volume without

number of dimensions? This question is difficult to answer. (Ibidem, 387) He can only

suppose that this space may be described by using categories of dynamics and suggestions

of movement, but in the end he leaves this task to future science ( ibidem, 388).

Anyway, the idea of olfaction as a kind of enlargement contrasts with the usual

interpretation of the same sensory experience (Kant 1968, 157; Simmel 1993, 291;

Blumenberg 2006, 675) as a movement from outside into the body, an absorption of odours

and an appropriation, conceived as analogous to the ingestion of food. Olfaction and taste

would thus entail the experience of an intake (Interiorisierung, Blumenberg, loc. cit.) and

represent the only senses in which the transgression of body limits is not necessarily linked to

feelings of injury or violation (Verletzung, ibid.). Fundamental here is the feeling of nearness

and intimacy, the intensity of displeasure caused by urban smellscapes and fellow citizens.

For example, both Kant and Simmel were convinced that olfaction more often causes

inconveniences and discomfort than delight and therefore that it would be a mistake to

attempt to sensitise the nose, because it would only make people unhappier. This

interpretation was at that time completely in tune with modern mans suspicion of smells, and

it still inspires the trend to render cities odour-free. By contrast, a phenomenologically

neutral description of olfactory space may contribute to our liberation from our present day

prejudice against odours.

Let us summarise. Olfactory space is, rather like acoustic space, a continuous,

dynamic and directional space crisscrossed by currents. In addition, it usually lacks borders,

even though thresholds of odoriferous areas may be perceived. Due to its instability, olfactory

space is without shape or a structure, but is rather an ever changing pattern and liquid. As a

medium of life, a smellscape has a specific impact on human beings, which is less evident

than enveloping, diffuse and pervasive or, on occasions, penetrating and pungent. The

perspectives of visual space are replaced in olfactory space by directions (trails, tracks and

traces), three-dimensionality by a pre-dimensional voluminosity and depth. In sum, spatial

order, which is typical for whats visual, becomes a spatial quality we call atmosphere.


14/17

14

5. Urban aesthetics and atmospheres

As we know, programs of urban modernization attempted to deodorise the city.12

At the end

of this process, some voices deplored its success, as it brought about also the loss of the aura

of cities (cf. Illich 1987, 94sq.) and produced monotonous blandscapes, neutral spaces,

effectively non-places, devoid of olfactory qualities (cf. ibidem, 107). Globalisation has

made all cities smell alike, of smog a mixture of petrol, detergents, effluent and fast

food (ibidem, 88). Nevertheless, this conclusion might seem exaggerated; deodorisation has

remained incomplete, and Gernot Bhme (2006, 128 sq.) is still overwhelmed by nostalgia

when he recalls the odours of the Parisian underground and is convinced he can distinguish

the former West and East Berlin by the smell of the lignite briquettes used in East Berlin.

Anyway, the concept of atmosphere has a broader meaning than smellscape since it

also takes into account the character of the city: its soundscape, city rhythms and the vitality

of its streets. Even so, smells are like no other sensory atmospheric phenomenon and are

essential to urban identity since they enable us to identify places and to identify oneself with

places (ibidem, 128). In spite of their profound emotional impact, atmospheres tend to

conceal themselves; this means that they are taken for granted by city residents, who have

grown used to them, and are apparent only to strangers (e.g. tourists) who encounter them.

Therefore a citys atmosphere is a counterpart to its image. The image is produced

deliberately and refers to the way in which the community wishes to present itself; this

corresponds to the individuals persona, the social mask. By contrast, airs or atmospheres

express physiognomies of individuals or cities, and these escape total control, betraying ones

regular practices, past, intimacies and lifestyle. If we think about body smells, public spaces

appear to be a battlefield or interface between the animal habits of the self and the person as a

social construct.

The concept of atmosphere is central to Bhmes aesthetics too. According to him,

atmospheres become objects of aesthetic experience when they are permitted to affect

spectators at a certain distance (cf. Bhme 1995, 30) and they can be encountered both in

natural and artistic settings, as well as in literature, film and the fine arts. Moreover,

atmosphere is regarded as a key-factor for grounding a new aesthetics of materials,

emotions, non-visual and non-verbal artworks, opposed to the mainstream of ocularcentric

12

In 1914 Otto Wagner (1979, 94 sq.) gave priority in urban planning to the liberation of cities from smoke andsoot, yet he nourished weak hopes that this would become possible within a predictable time. And two decades

later, Louis Wirth still included in the quality of life (desirability of various areas of the city) the absence ofnuisances such as noise, smoke, and dirt (Wirth 1964, 74).


15/17

15

and logocentric aesthetic theory which focuses on vision, the meaning of art and its verbal

interpretation. Nevertheless, Bhmes reader does not receive any hint as to whether all

atmospheres should be considered aesthetic or only some of them, nor how aesthetic urban

atmospheres may be deliberately engineered by paying attention to smells. For that purpose

the aesthetician relies upon the practical instructions provided by architects and urban

planners, since the architects work consists essentially in creating atmospheres. (Bhme

2006, 104, 109) Yet the expectations that architects who invoke the concept of atmosphere

would also provide explanations of how to devise smellscapes turn out to be unfounded. Let

us take a single example: Peter Zumthor (2006), who in a book called Atmosphren reveals

his secrets of how to produce atmospheric spaces. His advice is to focus on the body of

architecture, on its material presence and on the consonance of the materials, to take into

consideration the sound of the space and its temperature, to create degrees of intimacy, a

tension between indoors and outdoors, to be sensitive to the reflection of light and in the end

to create a wide range of moods ranging from serenity to seduction. In spite of his detailed

enumeration of creative strategies, the architectural outcome of his theory remains a

completely odourless space.

How curious the anosmia of the theory of architecture may seem, 13 it still has its

reasons, given the number of factors which make urban smellscapes escape rigorous planning,

leaving out of consideration such factors as the weather, peoples eating habits and their

movements. No matter how far rational planning and the regulation of behaviour may go,

odours are likely to remain the last citadel of freedom and indiscipline: smellscapes and

atmospheres in general are the result of all living beings in a city and these cannot be

subject to tight regulation. That is why the deliberate production of atmospheres has to go

beyond detailed architectural planning and include psychological, sociological and

anthropological insights into our lifestyles. To design urban atmospheres ultimately means to

consider the ways in which urban planning strategies encourage or discourage various

lifestyles. (Bhme 2006, 138).

In conclusion, smells create specific urban profiles and may be to some extent

regulated; nevertheless, the possibilities of designing local (aesthetically valuable)

atmospheres in public spaces are restricted by unpredictable factors, by the fluidity of the

space and by the lack of systematic training of olfaction. The paradoxical task of mapping

smellscapes has been conceived as a means of sensitising urbanites to the multi-sensory

13 Another example of the inodorate state of architectural thinking (Drobnick 2005, 265) might be Kevin

Lynch, whose analysis of the temporal rhythms of the city emphasises the effects cycles of vegetation have onwell-being, yet without mentioning their smells (Lynch 1988).


16/17

16

quality of public spaces. In particular, the urban smellscape as a space of interdependences is

something which concerns us all and thus calls for a sense of public responsibility.

References

Bischoff, Werner. 2006. Flchtige Rume. In: Heinz Paetzold (ed.), Integrale Stadtkultur. Verlag der

Bauhaus-Universitt Weimar, 140-155.

Bischoff, Werner. 2007. Nicht-visuelle Dimensionen des Stdtischen. BIS-Verlag der Carl von

Ossietzky Universitt Oldenburg.

Blumenberg, Hans. 2006.Beschreibung des Menschen. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Blumenberg, Hans. 2002.Zu den Sachen und zurck. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Bhme, Gernot. 1995.Atmosphre. Essays zur neuen sthetik.Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Bhme, Gernot. 2006.Architektur und Atmosphre. Mnchen: Fink.

Bollnow, Otto. 1963.Mensch und Raum. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

Classen, Constance; Howes, David; Synnott, Anthony. 1994.Aroma. The Cultural History of Smell,

London: Routledge.

Corbin, Alain. 1982.Le miasme et la jonquille: lodorat et limaginaire social XVIIIe-XIXe sicles.

Paris: Aubier Montaigne.

Dehaene, Michiel. 2004. Maps and Landscapes.Archis, Amsterdam 2/2004, 60-65.

Diaconu, Madalina. 2006. PatinaAtmosphereAroma: Towards an Aesthetics of Fine Differences.

In: Anna-Teresa Tyminiecka (ed.), Logos of Phenomenology and Phenomenology of the Logos. Book

Five. The Creative Logos. Aesthetic Ciphering in Fine Arts, Literature and Aesthetics. Dordrecht:

Springer, 131-148.

Drobnick, Jim. 2005. Volatile Effects. Olfactory Dimensions of Art and Architecture. In: David

Howes (ed.),Empire of the Senses: The Sensual Culture Reader. Oxford: Berg, 265-280.

Hauskeller, Michael. 1995. Atmosphren erleben: philosophische Untersuchungen zur

Sinneswahrnehmung. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.

Howes, David. 2005. HYPERESTHESIA, or, The Sensual Logic of Late Capitalism, in: David Howes

(ed.),Empire of the Senses. The Sensual Culture Reader. Oxford, New York: Berg, 281-303.

Husserl, Edmund. 1973. Zur Phnomenologie der Intersubjektivitt. Texte aus dem Nachla 1921

1928, Husserliana XIV. Ed. by Iso Kern. Dordrecht: Springer.

Illedits, Alexander; Illedits-Lohr, Karin. 1999. Nachbarrecht. Die Rechtsstellung der Nachbarn im

ffentlichen und zivilen Recht. Wien: Orac.

Illich, Ivan. 1987.H2O und die Wasser des Vergessens. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt.

Ingold, Tim. 2000. The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill.

London et al.: Routledge.


17/17

17

Kant, Immanuel. 1968. Der Streit der Fakultten. Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht, Werke.

Akademie-Textausgabe, Bd. VII. Berlin: Walter der Gruyter.

Lw, Martina. 2001.Raumsoziologie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Lynch, Kevin. 1989.Das Bild der Stadt. Braunschweig: Vieweg.

Lynch, Kevin. 1988. What Time Is This Place?. Cambridge, Mass. et al.: The MIT Press.

Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1945.Phnomnolgie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.

Payer, Peter. 1997.Der Gestank von Wien: ber Kanalgase, Totendnste und andere ble

Geruchskulissen. Wien: Dcker.

Payer, Peter. 2005. Die Zhmungder Gerche. Neue Geruchskulissen in der Stadt. In: Karl Brunner,

Petra Schneider (eds.), Umwelt Stadt. Geschichte des Natur- und Lebensraums Wien. Wiener

Umweltstudien 1. Wien, Kln, Weimar: Bhlau, 562-567.

Poiret, Nathalie. 1998. Odeurs impures. Du corps humain la cit (Grenoble, XVIII eXIXe sicle).

Terrain, no. 31, sept. 1998. http://terrain.revues.org/index3141.html (accessed May 7, 2009).

Porteous, Douglas J. 1990. Landscapes of the Mind: Worlds of Sense and Metaphor. University of

Toronto Press.

Schmitz, Hermann. 1967. Der leibliche Raum, System der Philosophie 3. Band: Der Raum, Erster

Teil. Bonn: Bouvier.

Simmel, Georg. 1993. Soziologie der Sinne. In: Aufstze und Abhandlungen 19011908. Bd. II,

Gesamtausgabe Bd. 8. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 276-292.

Sloterdijk, Peter. 2004. Sphren III. Schume. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Straus, Erwin. 1978. Vom Sinn der Sine. Ein Beitrag zur Grundlegung der Psychologie. Berlin et al.:

Springer.

Tellenbach, Hubert. 1968. Geschmack und Atmosphre. Medien menschlichen Elementarkontaktes.

Preface by F.J.J. Buytendijk. Salzburg: Otto Mller.

Wagner, Otto. 1979.Die Baukunst unserer Zeit. Wien: Lcker.

Wirth, Louis. 1964. Urbanism as a way of life. In: Albert J. Reiss Jr. (ed.), On Cities and Social Life:

selected papers. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 60-83.

Zumthor, Peter. 2006.Atmosphren. Architektonische Umgebungen. Die Dinge um mich herum.Basel, Boston, Berlin: Birkhuser.

Documents

Madalina Diaconu_Mapping Urban Smellscapes